-
161 So. 2d 670·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1964-03-03
·cited 1×
This case involves a dispute between two judgment creditors of the Republic of Cuba over the distribution of tobacco assets. The appellants sought to enforce an agreement with the appellee to settle their competing claims, but the trial court denied relief because the appellants'
-
95 So. 2d 426·
Fla.·
1957-04-24
·cited 1×
When land is conveyed as a gift with an express reversion clause conditioning retention on specific uses within five years, and the grantee performs practically nothing to accomplish those uses despite substantial prior negotiations establishing the parties' mutual intent to impr
-
Del.·
2026-02-03
North American Fire Ultimate Holdings appealed a Court of Chancery dismissal of its breach of contract claim against former employee Alan Doorly for violating restrictive covenants. The Delaware Supreme Court reversed, holding that consideration for restrictive covenants must be
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-03
The court held that the plaintiff established all elements for rescission of the commercial lease due to the defendant's failure to complete the landlord's work, entitling the plaintiff to summary judgment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-03-11
The court held that affirmative defenses directed at unpled claims or that are merely conclusory should be stricken, while those that function as denials should be treated as such rather than stricken.
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2024-05-15
When a contract is ambiguous and susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation, summary judgment is precluded and the matter must be submitted to a fact-finder. The AEIA's incorporation of the Charthouse Drive Plans was ambiguous regarding whether Grove Bay could constru
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-02-05
The court granted Siemens' renewed motion for summary judgment, finding that the breach of warranty claim was barred by a contractual disclaimer, the fraud claims were barred by the independent tort doctrine, and the rescission claim based on failure of consideration was not reco
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2023-05-31
The court reversed summary judgment on the primary contract dispute because the AEIA contained ambiguities regarding the exact scope and location of improvements to Charthouse Drive, precluding summary judgment and requiring jury determination of the parties' intent. The court re
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2022-08-24
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2020-10-30
The Superior Court dismissed Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.'s and Sweetwater Point, LLC's complaints, finding their claims time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The court held that the "discovery rule" and "inquiry notice" principles meant that the limitations per
-
273 So. 3d 110·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2019-02-13
The trial court properly granted the directed verdict against Manzzo in her action for declaratory relief and to quiet title.
-
243 So. 3d 1040·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2018-04-18
A party moving for summary judgment on a breach of contract claim must conclusively refute any affirmative defense of failure of consideration; the plaintiff failed to eliminate genuine issues of material fact regarding whether payment was actually received.
-
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12947·
M.D. Fla.·
2016-02-03
-
Del. Ch.·
2010-01-22
The court granted in part and denied in part Mitsubishi Power Systems Americas, Inc.'s (MPSA) motion for judgment on the pleadings. The court entered judgment in favor of MPSA on most counterclaims and affirmative defenses, finding that Babcock & Brown Infrastructure Group US, LL
-
Del. Ch.·
2006-08-14
The Court of Chancery should deny the motion to dismiss for failure to join indispensable parties, as the condominium association adequately represents the unit owners' interests in common elements. However, the Court should grant the motion to dismiss Counts II and III, which se
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2003-04-25
The court held that a motion to dismiss was granted as to the claim for failure of consideration (Count IV) but denied as to all other counts (Counts I-III and V-VIII). The court found that claims for misrepresentation, fraud, mutual mistake, breach of contract, and violation of
-
705 So. 2d 645·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1998-01-21
-
665 So. 2d 1147·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1996-01-10
-
651 So. 2d 190·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1995-02-24
Karen Chilton challenges a summary judgment dismissing her claim for insurance benefits after her premium check was returned for insufficient funds. The court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that the statutory notice requirements for policy cancellation do not apply when a
-
633 So. 2d 471·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1994-02-11
-
616 So. 2d 1157·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1993-04-14
Hawk Aircraft Refinishing, Inc. appeals a summary judgment in favor of the sellers (the Dodgens) on a promissory note for $75,000 executed as part consideration for the business purchase. The court reverses, finding the trial court abused its discretion by granting summary judgme
-
984 F.2d 715·
6th Cir.·
1993-01-22
The court held that the parties' conduct, particularly the buyer's actions and the seller's subsequent actions, manifested a mutual understanding and acceptance of a modified contract, making it effective despite initial disputes over earnest money handling.
-
982 F.2d 945·
6th Cir.·
1993-01-05
The court held that the bankruptcy court committed clear error in finding that Kitchen & Bath provided no documentary support for its claims regarding undelivered July orders and in holding that the seller was legally entitled to withhold delivery due to a past due balance on acc
-
970 F.2d 462·
8th Cir.·
1992-07-20
The court held that the arbitrator's determination that the contract never came into effect was binding on the player, precluding his subsequent claim against his agent.
-
785 F. Supp. 970·
M.D. Fla.·
1992-02-24
The court held that the insured's failure to ultimately terminate his existing disability policy constituted a breach of a dependent covenant, allowing for rescission of the new policy due to lack of consideration.
-
957 F.2d 775·
10th Cir.·
1992-02-20
A drawer of a money order cannot assert the defenses of its customer (the remitter) against the payee, unless those defenses involve theft or inconsistent restrictive endorsement.
-
585 So. 2d 1064·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1991-09-05
A settlor of an irrevocable life insurance trust sought damages from the trustee bank for negligence and breach of contract after the bank mismanaged the trust and allowed insurance policies to lapse. The Florida appellate court affirmed dismissal, holding that a settlor who has
-
901 F.2d 1470·
8th Cir.·
1990-04-27
The court held that an insured cannot use the insurer's failure to pay claims as a defense to paying premiums owed, nor can the insured offset damages against unpaid premiums under Iowa's Insurers Act.
-
891 F.2d 1463·
10th Cir.·
1989-12-18
The court held that a corporate officer's resignation under Kansas law is not exclusively required to be in writing and that the trial court erred in instructing the jury otherwise. The court also found that the exclusion of attorney-client privileged testimony was not an abuse o
-
885 F.2d 132·
4th Cir.·
1989-09-06
The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the insurer waived or was estopped from asserting the insured's failure to pay the premium deposit as a condition precedent to binder coverage.
-
539 So. 2d 488·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1988-12-30
Cabella sued the Witts to enforce a promissory note and mortgage on a condominium unit. The Witts counterclaimed for indemnity on a separate note and mortgage they had assumed, claiming failure of consideration because the two transactions were interrelated. The trial court ruled
-
522 So. 2d 885·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1988-02-17
Myrick purchased real property from the Smiths and executed a promissory note. When the Smiths failed to pay a special assessment lien they had agreed to cover, Myrick withheld two quarterly interest payments and later paid the lien himself. The Smiths sued to accelerate the note
-
823 F.2d 460·
11th Cir.·
1987-08-03
Grantors who jointly execute a general warranty deed are jointly and severally liable for damages resulting from a breach of that warranty.
-
488 So. 2d 846·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1986-04-22
The court held that rescission of a settlement agreement is generally not available for delayed payment absent fraud, misrepresentation, or undue influence, but the appellant may amend his complaint for breach of contract.
-
774 F.2d 1314·
5th Cir.·
1985-10-25
The court held that the release agreement between the parties was supported by sufficient consideration and was therefore valid, precluding the breach of contract claim.
-
452 So. 2d 939·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1984-04-19
Robert Aldredge sued East Colonial Refuse Service, Inc. on a promissory note. The trial court improperly admitted parol evidence to show the note lacked consideration based on one defendant's unilateral belief that another party would pay it. The appellate court reversed, holding
-
715 F.2d 410·
8th Cir.·
1983-08-24
The court held that the buyer's purchase of pregnant, heavier heifers was not a like-kind substitute for cover, and that damages for nondelivery should be based on the contract price and market price of the heifers Woods was obligated to sell.
-
1899 U.S. App. LEXIS 3183·
S.D. Fla.·
1983-01-19
-
690 F.2d 578·
6th Cir.·
1982-10-07
A partner's breach of a partnership agreement, even if it causes dissolution, does not warrant forfeiture of their entire partnership interest; damages are the appropriate remedy. The court also found that the magistrate's factual finding regarding the scope of the partnership ag
-
418 So. 2d 463·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1982-08-25
The court held that affirmative defenses in a mortgage foreclosure suit are not irrelevant and should not be stricken without leave to amend.
-
595 F.2d 572·
Ct. Cl.·
1979-01-18
The court held that the United States did not infringe Bascom's patent because the alleged infringing activity occurred outside U.S. territorial waters, and the patent laws are strictly construed to apply only within the United States.
-
45 Fla. Supp. 5·
Fla. Cty. Ct.·
1976-04-30
First Prudential Bank sued Community Federal Savings & Loan to enforce a certificate of deposit obtained by William Dailey through fraud (using a check drawn on a closed account). The court held that the certificate was non-negotiable because it did not comply with UCC requiremen
-
529 F.2d 659·
8th Cir.·
1976-01-21
The court held that the defendants' defense of failure of consideration and their counterclaim for lost profits lacked merit, warranting affirmance of the summary judgment.
-
303 So. 2d 322·
Fla.·
1974-11-13
Lawrence, as guarantor of a stock purchase agreement, challenged summary judgment for Data Lease in a foreclosure action, arguing that Data Lease failed to secure promised accounts receivable financing and that he was entitled to credit for funds from a liquidation sale. The Flor
-
508 F.2d 377·
2d Cir.·
1974-11-11
The court held that the New York Real Property Tax Law does not imply a warranty of priority for tax liens sold by municipalities, and common law doctrines of impossibility or frustration of purpose do not apply to excuse the purchaser's loss from a superior federal mortgage.
-
289 So. 2d 426·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1974-01-22
The court held that the husband's actions in withholding support payments did not constitute a repudiation of the property settlement agreement by the wife, thus the agreement remained enforceable.
-
259 So. 2d 175·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1972-03-09
The court held that the trial court erred in striking the guarantor's affirmative defenses of failure of consideration and signing in a representative capacity.
-
36 Fla. Supp. 197·
Dade Cty. Small Cl. Ct.·
1971-06-02
A guaranty of a pre-existing debt is not binding without new, independent consideration flowing to the guarantor.
-
436 F.2d 477·
Ct. Cl.·
1971-01-22
The court held that the executor was not entitled to recover deductions made from the deceased's retired pay before his divorce, as the election to participate in the annuity plan was a binding agreement for which consideration was provided.
-
233 So. 2d 863·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1970-04-14
The court held that there was a failure of consideration for the promissory note because the seller notified the savings and loan institution that the escrow account had not been transferred, depriving the buyer of beneficial ownership. The court affirmed the judgment for the amo